The new Christian Forum

[TerryMiller]

Maybe I'm oversimplified, but you also seem to be talking around the scientific progression of Hypothesis, Theory, and Law. Or, has science decided that the progression is no longer valid? If not, has evolution reached the level of Law? As for Dawkins, you also didn't answer my question about laughing off the scientists that Strobel interviewed for his books, so if you don't recognize their contributions to science, then why should I recognize the contributions of a scientist that seems to be totally anti-God?

Maybe I'm being jaded here, but over the years, we've seen the results of "scientists" that declared eggs, butter, meat, and who knows what else, to be bad, only to find later that those things aren't as harmful as those "scientists" declared. We see the same thing in the climate science area. While there are some scientists claiming global warming is happening, there seems to be a lot more scientists saying that it is a normal cycle and that the climate is cooling.

 

[Eagle Eye]

Interesting thought about religion. Could it be your "thinking" is actually a result from brainwashing? After all, "scientists" are always trying to disprove God, but so far, I think the Bible still outsells all the scientific tomes combined.

You completely misunderstand what science is and what scientists do.
Yet, you speak as if you know of these things, as if you were a scientist....

Science does not seek to disprove GOD. As a matter of fact Science CANNOT prove or disprove the existence of GOD, because science deals only with the natural world. The natural world exists of things you can measure, manipulate, see, etc. etc.

Whereas GOD is not a natural being. It is SUPERNATURAL..... Hence cannot be measured, or manipulated.... THAT IS WHY YOU HAVE FAITH IN GOD... because you can't actually show facts that there is a god.

Where as Evolution can be measured ( we can measure genetic change in a population over time)!
Therefore believing in evolution is not faith based.... it is fact based.

Welcome to the natural world.

 

[Eagle Eye]

Maybe I'm oversimplified, but you also seem to be talking around the scientific progression of Hypothesis, Theory, and Law. Or, has science decided that the progression is no longer valid? If not, has evolution reached the level of Law? As for Dawkins, you also didn't answer my question about laughing off the scientists that Strobel interviewed for his books, so if you don't recognize their contributions to science, then why should I recognize the contributions of a scientist that seems to be totally anti-God?

Maybe I'm being jaded here, but over the years, we've seen the results of "scientists" that declared eggs, butter, meat, and who knows what else, to be bad, only to find later that those things aren't as harmful as those "scientists" declared. We see the same thing in the climate science area. While there are some scientists claiming global warming is happening, there seems to be a lot more scientists saying that it is a normal cycle and that the climate is cooling.

You are 100% correct.... you are jaded.

Stop believing that science is going to find the ultimate answer to every natural thing... start believing that science is the practice of trying to understand the natural world.

Scientists draw conclusions while fully aware that their data and studies are limited. There is no perfect experiment.... It is the general public that fails to understand the limitations of science. They believe that scientists find "the answer" to complex problems/phenomena, and then feel cheated when "the answer" changes due to new data or technology.

 

[Eagle Eye]

Sorry if I sound mean and butthole'ish

Im just being straight forward. please don't take it personal, except for the comment about being jaded. that was a bit personal.

 

[Okie4570]

You completely misunderstand what science is and what scientists do.
Yet, you speak as if you know of these things, as if you were a scientist....

Science does not seek to disprove GOD. As a matter of fact Science CANNOT prove or disprove the existence of GOD, because science deals only with the natural world. The natural world exists of things you can measure, manipulate, see, etc. etc.

Whereas GOD is not a natural being. It is SUPERNATURAL..... Hence cannot be measured, or manipulated.... THAT IS WHY YOU HAVE FAITH IN GOD... because you can't actually show facts that there is a god.

Where as Evolution can be measured ( we can measure genetic change in a population over time)!
Therefore believing in evolution is not faith based.... it is fact based.

Welcome to the natural world.

Are you a scientist? Is anyone in this thread a scientist? I'm not.

 

[JD8]

Maybe I'm oversimplified, but you also seem to be talking around the scientific progression of Hypothesis, Theory, and Law. Or, has science decided that the progression is no longer valid? If not, has evolution reached the level of Law? As for Dawkins, you also didn't answer my question about laughing off the scientists that Strobel interviewed for his books, so if you don't recognize their contributions to science, then why should I recognize the contributions of a scientist that seems to be totally anti-God?

Maybe I'm being jaded here, but over the years, we've seen the results of "scientists" that declared eggs, butter, meat, and who knows what else, to be bad, only to find later that those things aren't as harmful as those "scientists" declared. We see the same thing in the climate science area. While there are some scientists claiming global warming is happening, there seems to be a lot more scientists saying that it is a normal cycle and that the climate is cooling.

I'm not talking around it..... I'm just trying to explain what laws of science really entail, and it's more difficult because you have a seemingly lower fundamental understanding of science. Here's a link that will simplify what I'm saying.

http://evolutionfaq.com/faq/why-isnt-evolution-considered-law

What you don't understand about Strobel is the level of bias and emotion. I don't require you to read Dawkins or even "believe" what he says. However, there has to be an acknowledgement of significant reference and logical application of proven phenomenon in lieu of ..... "I interviewed a few scientists." It's a glorified media report in book form that you just happen to agree with. More power to you.


In terms of you being jaded towards science because of eggs and global warming, then you are a puppet of the media. You see the media cherry picks segments of scientific studies and applies sensationalism to generate revenue or create an agenda. Unless you have been reading scientific journals for years, you're getting an interpretation of what was actually written or conducted. If you are really curious as to what scientist have said about eggs or global warming, then read the actual work.... not what MSM says. Finally, shouldn't we leave the science to the scientists and religion to the religious? If you feel differently then you might want to look at a little history. Such as how christians responded to Galileo's findings back in the day.

 

[Eagle Eye]

Are you a scientist? Is anyone in this thread a scientist? I'm not.

Yes sir, I am

 

[Okie4570]

Yes sir, I am

Good deal, what's your field.

 

[Eagle Eye]

Biology but also science education

 

[Eagle Eye]

In terms of you being jaded towards science because of eggs and global warming, then you are a puppet of the media. You see the media cherry picks segments of scientific studies and applies sensationalism to generate revenue or create an agenda. Unless you have been reading scientific journals for years, you're getting an interpretation of what was actually written or conducted. If you are really curious as to what scientist have said about eggs or global warming, then read the actual work.... not what MSM says. Finally, shouldn't we leave the science to the scientists and religion to the religious? If you feel differently then you might want to look at a little history. Such as how christians responded to Galileo's findings back in the day.

This is spot on